But your OP was an accusation of "lazy journalism" and listing quotes as examples, and Heppenstall is the only journalist on Bulls matters.

do me a favour and do as I suggested - next game,take a pen & notepad,make your notes of moves,infringements ,changeovers,scores, missed opportunities and anthing else which you may feel the reader would find of interest then transcribe that into a match report (use any paper as a guide) in time for the sunday deadline of about 1600 hrs for the weekly papers on a monday morning and se how you get on

(then read the published report and see how much it differs from the copy you sent to the sub editor...)

it's easy to criticise - try it yourself and see how easy it [ireally [/iis !

I assisted Mick commentate once last year; even trying to expalin live action while watching the game is difficult enough, never mind taking your eyes off the game to write things down. Incredibly Mick appear to manage both. I think there is an extra person within that huge coat of his. And one for those who bag refs, try running quickly for 80 minutes in busy traffic while keeping up an inntelligent conversation. I was only captain a few times, but trying to continually communicate with your team mates is like rubbing your stomach while patting your head while exhausted.

have you read the OP's original post? there isnt any criticism of the match reports, which you keep going on about, the criticism is about the articles we keep getting between matches which are largely regurgitated with minor variations week after week.

You will have to join me again mate to see how I've progressed the commentary.

Would love to mate, thanks, if only to see how I haven't.

Dave wasn't a liar and I think the rep he got was more than a little unjustified. He's a good writer and a decent bloke, hence why he's now working for one of the largest regional papers in the country.

In terms of current coverage, Ross is between a rock and a hard place when it comes to doing pieces with players. He can ill afford to provoke controversy or write deliberately sensationalised reports as it would cause irreparable damage to his relationship with the club - one which is absolutely vital to his job as the local rag's Bulls correspondent. Any interviews he conducts with players will be overwhelming bland because modern sportsmen are trained to answer questions without a jot of personality, insight or opinion but he has to report what they say in a factual, straightforward manner.

On the other hand, he faces the challenge of keeping coverage fresh and entertaining so must find a balance in his relationship with the club where he can't be afraid to question within reason. Usually, opinion pieces, features and match reports are the best vehicle for this so they're an important tool for any local journo. Ultimately, compare the content in the T&A with any other local paper up and down the country and much of it won't be too dissimilar.

Did it ever occur to anyone that the reason that the T&A weekday reports can be a bit bland is that there usually isn't much to say that is interesting?

You can't report what isn't happening - not without making stuff up, which I'm sure we all agree would be a bad things.

I suspect that most weeks the team are just getting on with training and preparing for the next match. There simply isn't all that interesting to report. So we either have nothing at all in the T&A or the kind of generic interviews that we get. Which would people prefer?

They all went out to Nandos for the big opening night - where was the coverage about team bonding etc
When they did the preseason army training, what did they actually do ? Why not go along to training and join in with them Mr Ross and see how hard it is (as per Ian Stafford's Books (Daily Mail Journo) - which are fantastic by the way if anyone hasn't read them !)
They do actually train all week - what have they actually been doing in training ?
What does a crypical week look like for a RL professional ?
What about doing 20 questions with a few of the players - fav restaurant / music etc
I am sure that some of them might actually have interests out of the game - what are they

Its hardly controversial, its not going to get someone's back up, it only needs a bit of thought to actually do something DIFFERENT ....

This. WIth 24 hour wall to wall news things need to be made more & more extreme to grab attention, even though they don't warrant it. Which, to me, results in the ludicrous claims on here about everything being a joke & a disgrace.

So let me get this straight. You're panning the coverage Ross puts in the paper, and suggesting instead of interviewing players about how close they are to comebacks etc, you suggest he runs a story about them all going to Nandos?

Possibly [url=http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/sport/sportbulls/9560550.Bradford_Bulls__Naked_truth_reveals_Sammut___s_motto_for_life/this[/url is the type of article Staffbull would like to see, and I agree

So, he's damned if Nandoes, and damned if Nandoesn't, then. Sums it up for me.

I thought that when I read this. It's a well-written piece which brings out the personality of both player and writer. A creative way to turn more fairly run-of-the-mill quotes into an engaging story.

Problem is, you can't do pieces like this every day. The Bullpen page on a Thursday is a good home for this kind of piece but the daily news pieces need to be more straight down the line. There is scope for more like this though and features which show thought from outside the box.

I can understand what you're saying about coverage needing to be a bit different, which is why I enjoy opinion pieces, features which delve into the player's personality and features which draw on unexpected/ aspects of the club's day-to-day operations or a player's life.

The problem with a lot of what you suggested is that it's often just infeasible. I very much doubt that Mick Potter would let anyone get involved in a training session or document what goes on in any kind of detail. I seem to remember him kicking off a bit when Sky tried to film part of a session last year.

A feature about the players going to Nandos would be dull and 20 questions-style pieces are programme fodder not credible journalism. Articles looking at aspects of the player's lives outside rugby can be good but only when they appear sparingly and only if the player does anything worth reporting.

It's not as straightforward as you make out but I do think coverage should be more varied than a series of straight-up reports about how the players are disappointed/buzzing after the weekend's game. I think Ross is trying to achieve this and will have more success the more comfortable he gets in the job and the more comfortable the players/club become with him.

so,what do you propose the person writes about that you might find interesting - maybe write to him or her with ideas ?

One can always try the 'scoop' technique where info is sensationalised to whip up interest ie. tell the truth about what players are getting up to off-field - that kind of info is easy to rake up,problem is that any bond or trust between journo & club has been broken so that's why journos have to stick with the mundane training chit chat or injury updates etc until matchday finally arrives.

what do you expect exactly ?

I personally find player interviews interesting but that's just me - also I don't think papers or mags talk enough about the fans,every fan has a story (or three) to tell...

I take it that when Ross moves on from the T&A all you highly trained journalists complete with unprecedented knowledge of covering a sports team will be sending your CV's to the Argus for consideration?

This thread really is an abomination and shows a total lack of respect to Ross.

The Sammut piece was a good read anyway

He should count himself lucky. Some T and A reporters have been called 'liars' without a solitary piece of supporting evidence.

to summarise: theres the real reporting such as match reports, which nobody seems to be criticising Ross for, and the "PR" reporting which is predominantly between match and more difficult given the editors demand for column inches when nothing much is going on to provide material.

Which is amazingly like this blog, (including the dodgy semantics that started this latest incarnation of this topic going): proper posts about games and real events such as the Odsal deal (as shown by Adey), and then in between mostly a load of nonsense. Physician, heal thyself, by casting out the mote in your own eye. or is that mixing malapropisms?

Ross's copy is fine by me.

Given the constraints he will have to work within (access to players and info - including the identikit "interviews" are in the Club's gift; lots of people don't actually buy the paper and help pay his salary; the team has been pants for too long now; there are periods when nothing much actually happens...), I can't see the justification for any harsh criticism at all. Indeed, I thought Connor was good but Ross is producing a lot of material and good content.

Speaking as someone who struggles to take notes for minutes for meetings and then produce the minutes at short order afterwards (and I've been having to do THAT all my working life and I bloody hate it...) I have nothing but respect for those who have the ability to produce an accurate and informative match report at short order. And Ross's are pretty comprehensive. Or commentate on a match while it is in progress. Indeed, that's why even though Gledhill can be a wally when it suits him, he bows to no-one when it comes to his commentaries and post-match reports. Its a bloody hard job to do well (and Gledhill does), and critics could do worse than try and do it themselves IMO.

i wonder why exactly the same criticisms aren't being made of Bill Arthur, who speaks to the same players after the Sky games? Listen to them, and then tell me how you could remotely construct a fresh or novel report from answers which are 99% cliches and very tired ones at that. The very same ones they provide to Ross. if this is all they can come up with - what's he supposed to write?

To be fair nearly all sportsmen come out with the same cliches straight afetr the heat of battle.

of course, because there are only so many things that can be discussed - it's all very repetitive in whichever sport you are reporting.Press conferences whether they be pre match, midweek or post match are boring affairs ,just rituals that have to be undertaken.